linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] signals: don't copy siginfo

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <19f34abd0902261218u388de998l1204857bde9bbe32@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:18:32 +0100
From:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] signals: don't copy siginfo_t on dequeue

2009/2/26 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>:
> So. dequeue_signal() returns NULL if there is no siginfo queued. In that
> case we assume that the signal is not pending.
>
> But this is not right. Think about SEND_SIG_FORCED, or __sigqueue_alloc()
> failure when the signal is sent. Or look at zap_other_threads() for example,
> it just sets the bit in ->pending but doesn't queue siginfo.

I will investigate. Thanks for looking, and thanks for the pointers :-)


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/